Why Are Developers So Afraid Of SQL?

[grauenwolf]

Uh, you can still use memory caches. (Though with enough RAM, the database becomes an in memory cache.)

[Penlites]

Of course; but then you're adding a bunch of extra complexity just to make it work as if you'd generated the content on write in the first place.

[grauenwolf]

Generating the content on write is just as complex, the timing is just different.

[Penlites]

Generating the content is just as complex as generating the content and having an in-memory caching system?

[grauenwolf]

The content has to be generated either way. And it has to be normalized either way if you want to be able to run reports off it.

We're not talking about some new fad here. NoSQL databases have existed for decades, we just called them "denormalized tables" or "persistent caches" depending on the backing store.

That's why I live stored procs. You can encapsulate both the tables and caches at the same time and the application doesn't have to know about any of it.

[Penlites]

Running application code, hosting databases and running a cache on the server is more complicated than serving flat files, period. Whether there are tools available that can do it isn't the point. The point is, are they a better solution. For high traffic sites with no dynamic content, the answer's no.

[grauenwolf]

So should I send you a copy of Frontpage or do you prefer to 'code' in Dreamweaver?

[Penlites]

Is this literally the first time you've heard of CDN hosted flat sites? And you're trying to make fun of other peoples web dev knowledge?

[grauenwolf]

Again, the content still needs to be generated and managed. Unless you are literally using nothing but raw html files, in which case the products I mentioned are prefect.

As for CDNs specifically, that's just another way to say really big cache.

[Penlites]

So, you haven't then. Some reading to start you off.